Palin V

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
[b]

So, you were pointing out that you feel the Republicans are brilliant, tacticians.

Well, I would have to say that really remains to be seen, does it not?

Often, what seems at first to be a [i]clever[/i]move, in politics, in particular one that is made in haste, as this one was, usually turns out to be...well....not so clever.[/b]

---

Now that I'm back online and starting to pay more attention to the outside world I'm starting to lean towards a 'clever' move backfiring over the long term. Might just be wishful thinking on my part though.
Today according to some stuff that I heard on CNN as well as some articles where Cindy McCain has spoken out about how while she respects Palins right to her views she disagrees in the areas of with sex education and on a number of other major points about abortion. Maybe it's part of the strategy to have Cindy McCain represent a more moderate 'female' viewpoint but to me it did seem a little strange to have such disagreement expressed so soon after the nomination announcement.

I've also read some mumblings or maybe gossip is a better term the Cindy McCain is pretty unhappy with the choice, but who knows whether that is true or even matters.
They were interviewing people who work with Palin including republican officials and the comments weren't exactly what you want to hear particularly from people who actually belong to the party that one is running for. I haven't done any checking into it further then the brief things I saw while channel changing but a few were pretty damming. One state official, a repub apparently said that people are afraid and intimidated by her and she is well known to go after anyone who disagrees with her on pretty much anything, like in a personal vengence sort of way. Of course one has to be aware of potential sexism creeping into these sort of comments and of course negative campaigning but according to the info some people saying these things are republican which to me at least indicates that something more is going on then just sheer partisanship.
They also talked about lies and exagerations about things she's taking credit for.
I haven't honestly been paying much attention to what she has said but I guess she's been playing up some pipeline that she says is a done deal, being built and taking credit for and the truth is it's still in the negotiation phase and the earliest it would even be started is around 2017 or 18. There's a few other things they mentioned regarding some major legislation that she's claimed rather ardently that she was responsible for and they said that no none of it is true and that everything was done before she ever came onto the scene and all she did was sign it when she came to office.

Whether any of this will get through to the public I really hard to tell. Right now it seems that there is a bit of sparkly golden time with the whole thing and anything negative is just sliding off with some well worded spin and rhetoric. Once the golden period and the hype wears down though it will be interesting to see if she and they can keep it up.
Oh and I'm not looking forward to seeing or reading more of how she is 'so hot in that libraian, school teacher sort of way' so ergo, 'rock on, we'll have a smokin VP!! Vote vote' which I came across today in my travels. Makes me ill and I wouldn't be surprised if that creeps into to mainstream more as time goes on. Bleh.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
[b]

Actually, I think that is part of the appeal of Palin for many, many voters. She took on the Republican establishment in Alaska because it was corrupt (including the state’s attorney general). She then challenged the sitting Republican governor of the state—and kicked his arse. As a result, she has an 80% approval rating in the state (the highest approval rating of any governor).

So, yeah, you’re going to hear a lot of grumbling by many Republicans in Alaska but that’s just going to help Palin, not hurt her.[/b]

---

Well yes I suppose it could if that part of the message gets across that way or I guess better put if they manage to get that important part of the message to keep sticking as I believe that's one of the main 'themes' in her initial intro to the public that was and is being empathized. If however in process of that arse kicking she ends up acting no better then the establishment being fought and stuff like this comes out whether true or not that sort of billing can come back and bite you in the butt. It's a lot to live up to and this position is a very different ball game. I will give them some credit at least for laying the foundations of responding to some of this sort of critizism with the whole 'I'm not part of the political elite in Washington (same as Alaska) so they don't like me and will critzize me line' As you say time will tell on many accounts. Whether that line will hold out long enough to deflect whatever comes is the question. It is appealing of course but longterm it's a pretty precarious deflection tactic to keep up. It gets rather old so to speak if thats the response to everything. It's more show then anything else if one doesn't have what's needed to back it up.

People in Alaska might understand the reasons for the grumbling and solid repubs might understand it but joe blow public may just hear...'geeze her own party members are saying some pretty damning stuff' and the rest of the message gets lost. I can't remember the exact quote but basically all that needs to happen in the case of this message is enough doubt to it's truth and it loses it's power.
In terms of the social/religious right which she really appeals to I doubt anything will make much difference as she seems solid in the myopic points they are looking for and as I've been reading on a couple of disscussion boards 'A New Hope' (Star Wars again...)
McCain has to get more then them to win though.

This election has been about pesonalities and stories, not policies. If it was about policies, we would have a Clinton vs. Romney race. Obama became a phenomenon not because he offered any specific policy or plan, but because his story appealed to many. Young energetic black American senator, son of a single mother, rising fast and taking on an old establishment, promising change and making history. Americans like such stories. Now the republicans countered with their own story, which is as appealing to the audience as Obama's, if not more. In that sense there isn't much difference between Obama and Palin.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boom Boom:
[b]

They both have compelling personal stories, but the real difference is that McCain has voted in favour of 90% of Bush's agenda.[/b]

---

From an outsider point of view, there wasn't much difference between Bush and Bill Clinton in US foreign policy either.

[url=http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/USElection/2008/09/05/6676926-ap.html]Palin church wants to 'pray away the gay'[/url]

quote:

---

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s church is promoting a conference that promises to convert gays into heterosexuals through the power of prayer.

“You’ll be encouraged by the power of God’s love and His desire to transform the lives of those impacted by homosexuality,” said an insert in the bulletin of the Wasilla Bible Church, where Palin has prayed since she was a child.

Palin’s conservative Christian views have energized that part of the Republican electorate, which was lukewarm to John McCain’s candidacy before he named her as his vice-presidential choice. She is anti-abortion, opposing exceptions for rape and incest, and opposes gay marriage and spousal rights for gay couples.

Focus on the Family, a national Christian fundamentalist organization, is conducting the “Love Won Out” Conference in Anchorage, about 50 kilometres from Wasilla.

---

[url=http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/troopergate...

Is she just making shit up? [url=http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/]Alaska state jet didn't fly on eBay[/url]

excerpt:

"How many saw her speech a couple of nights ago? Wasn't it fabulous?" McCain said Friday during a campaign stop in Cedarburg, Wisconsin. "You know what I enjoyed the most? She took the luxury jet that was purchased by her predecessor and sold it on eBay — and made a profit."

excerpt:

But it turns out the twin-engine Westwind II was a tough sell on the Web — and the state eventually pulled it offline and sold it through an ordinary brick-and-mortar brokerage, [b]for a loss[/b], a spokeswoman said Friday.

"Governor Palin has been correct in saying that she put the plane on eBay," McCain campaign spokeswoman Maria Comella told CNN. "They did end up selling it for $2.1 million. but not on eBay."

But she neglected to mention it didn't sell on eBay; and that it eventually sold for less than the asking price. [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]

It's an example of a politican taking liberties with the truth.

Gee, politicans taking liberties with the truth! [img]tongue.gif" border="0[/img]

In the Thursday, September 4 [i]National Post[/i] columnist [b]Jonathan Kay[/b] ripped into the CBC's [b]Neil MacDonald[/b] for a report on Palin on Tuesday's [i]National[/i] TV news that Kay claims was nothing but debunked rumours:

[url=http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=767602]The CBC's bogus smear on Sarah Palin[/url]

Among other things, including a recitation of the remote right's traditional white-hot hatred of MacDonald, there is this paragraph:

quote:

---

But then the rumour fell apart. Photos surfaced of Sarah, clearly pregnant, going about her gubernatorial duties in early 2008. It was also established that Bristol is five months pregnant right now -- making the rumour a biological impossibility. "I shouldn't have dignified this with an e-mail," my friend reported rumour -- even before it had been debunked. The Daily Kos itself shut up about the subject from Monday onwards.

---

However, from the [i]Anchorage Daily News[/i] of April 22nd, long before there was any talk of a national candidacy and just four days after the birth of Trig we get this story:

[url=http://www.adn.com/front/story/382864.html]Palins' child diagnosed with Down syndrome (04/22/08)[/url]

It contains this paragraph:

quote:

---

Palin never got big with this pregnancy. She said she didn't try to hide it but didn't feel a need to alert the airline, either.

---

I used the Post's email form to send the link to this story directly to Jonathan Kay, but there has been no response.

Bias?
The National Post certainly thinks so - it is a master at the game of editorializing all stories.

------

I'd call it "overwork", in a CBC created by a frightened Conservative government in the Depression and now threatened by a neo-con descendant with extinction.

Watch Radio 2 forced soon to take on advertising.

Didn't palin give birth in Texas? Delivering a sppech even after her water broke.

I suppose Kay is alluding CBC stupidity in airing the rumour 2 days after bloggers discounted it but Kay more or less comes off as CBC bashing to no effect.I can't find the story on CBC so I don't know.

The MacDonald brothers are quite successful in the Canadian broadcasting scene and success demands a certain amount of artistic license,I suppose.

No-one will watch some dullard quoting corn futures, will they?

NYTimes' Paul Krugman shows how Palin fits right in to the GOP's playing "The Resentment Strategy".

Quote)
But don’t be fooled either by Mr. McCain’s long-ago reputation as a maverick or by Ms. Palin’s appealing persona: the Republican Party, now more than ever, is firmly in the hands of the angry right, which has always been much bigger, much more influential and much angrier than its counterpart on the other side.

What’s the source of all that anger?

Some of it, of course, is driven by cultural and religious conflict: fundamentalist Christians are sincerely dismayed by Roe v. Wade and evolution in the curriculum. What struck me as I watched the convention speeches, however, is how much of the anger on the right is based not on the claim that Democrats have done bad things, but on the perception — generally based on no evidence whatsoever — that Democrats look down their noses at regular people.

Thus Mr. Giuliani asserted that Wasilla, Alaska, isn’t “flashy enough” for Mr. Obama, who never said any such thing. And Ms. Palin asserted that Democrats “look down” on small-town mayors — again, without any evidence.

What the G.O.P. is selling, in other words, is the pure politics of resentment; you’re supposed to vote Republican to stick it to an elite that thinks it’s better than you. Or to put it another way, the G.O.P. is still the party of Nixon.

(end quote)

What Krugman isn't saying, for political reasons, is that the GOP is playing the populist message to the little folk in the Heartland, they who REALLY resent uppity "Eastern" or "Washington" , "elites".

Obama early on made the mistake of talking about the rural people of Pennsylvania who cling to gun ownership, and set himself up for the old charge - and his handlers didn't know any better.

quote:

---

Sarah Palin wants to put herself out there as “every woman”. She wants to be seen as “just your average hockey mom”, and other mommies see themselves and their reality reflected through Palin, except, mamis of color, that is.

The talk returns to mommy wars, not mami wars, because the entire conversation excludes Latinas and other moms of color. We are not even soldiers. Even for so called progressive white feminist, the war is fought by them and maybe, if mamis like me are lucky, we’ll reap some benefit. When I was a pregnant teenager, in a Latin American country where abortion was and still is illegal (Chile), there was no opting out of pregnancy or working. Which is why the debate of how Palin could go back to work after having a baby with special needs or how a pregnant unmarried teenage daughter is being used, feels like a sideshow with little significance in reality. The politics of choice is being raised, with the emergence of a woman who is anti-choice, even in cases of rape or incest and with no talk of how for women of color, choice goes beyond an abortion and means the very right to have children (forget 5!) Imaginate if Michelle Obama had five children? Imaginate if one of the Obama children were older and pregnant? Imagine the hate and stereotypes that would be unleashed? Oh wait, I don’t have to imagine, as a single mami of color, I live it. Palin’s large brood isn’t seen as a strain on the system. They are a beautiful portrait of an “American” family making every other family, families like mine, ugly.

(snip)

Palin positions herself as continuing Clinton’s struggle, as continuing the struggle set forth by Geraldine Ferraro, the first woman to run as a vice-presidential candidate. Let’s not forget that Ferraro called Obama “lucky” for being black. Is Palin then lucky for having five children, like my abuela did before being forcibly sterilized? You wanna talk about Palin’s uterus or the uterus of her daughter? I want to talk about my abuela’s uterus, how it’s power was deemed dangerous because of it’s power to bear brown Spanish speaking babies, my uterus and it’s abortions, miscarriages, and pregnancies, violations upon it, the uterus of an immigrant woman being viewed as a weapon in a culture war and the need to put those immigrant women in chains as they push babies from them and the need the U.S. government has to separate mamis and babies and deport and dispose.

---

Full article and comments here: [url=http://www.racialicious.com/2008/09/05/mccain’s-vp-pick-palin-and-the-politica-and-privilege-of-white-woman’hood-mommy’hood/]Palin and white womanhood on Racialicious[/url]

I'm calling bullshit on this sexism charge, when the Republicans themselves planned right from the beginning to use it as a tool to shield Palin from the weight of personal hypocrisy and political malfeasance, if not her odious reactionary views. The people who are advancing this notion are playing directly into the hands of the Republicans.

Stargazer, your signature line fits perfectly with how I feel while trying to comprehend all of the BS that's floating around this election right now.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ceti:
[b] The people who are advancing this notion are playing directly into the hands of the Republicans.[/b]

---

So are the people who are being sexist, like Harry Reid. The Republicans are just dying for Democratic attack dogs to go after Palin in sexist ways. For the most part, Obama's campaign has been trying hard not to go there, which is commendable. But I think it's also fair to keep a sharp eye on the Democrats and to make sure they don't go there - and to give them a smack when they do.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
[b]I agree with you completely.

I have zero pity for this nasty woman. The Repubs are setting her up as some type of anti-choice feminist, when in reality she'd strip women of their rights in a heartbeat if she could.[/b]

---

No one would ever question whether a man with small children has enough time to be VP. The fact that this is being asked of Palin - on the left and the right - is extremely sexist. Regardless of her views, it is still sexism. You cannot say that sexism is fine just because you disagree with this woman! And Michelle is right, the repubs were hoping for sexism...unfortunately it has been delivered.

This meme seems to be popping up more now. I apologize if it's been posted before I haven't made it through all of the Palin threads in great detail.
Honestly, though I know I shouldn't be surprised, I was flabergasted reading this.

[url=http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28389]Welcome Back Dad[/url]

quote:

---

I’ve been trying to convince my fellow conservatives that they have been wasting their time in a fruitless quest for a new Ronald Reagan to emerge and lead our party and our nation. I insisted that we’d never see his like again because he was one of a kind.

I was wrong!

Wednesday night I watched the Republican National Convention on television and there, before my very eyes, I saw my Dad reborn; only this time he's a she.

---

quote:

---

Obviously un-intimidated by either the savage onslaught to which the left-leaning media had subjected her, or the incredible challenge she faced -- and oozing with confidence -- she strode defiantly to the podium and proved she was everything and even more than John McCain told us.

Much has been made of the fact that she is a woman. What we saw last night, however, was something much more than a just a woman accomplishing something no Republican woman has ever achieved. What we saw was a red-blooded American with that rare, God-given ability to rally her dispirited fellow Republicans and take up the daunting task of leading them -- and all her fellow Americans -- on a pilgrimage to that shining city on the hill my father envisioned as our nation’s real destination.

---

quote:

---

Like Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin is one of us. She knows how most of us live because that’s the way she lives. She shares our homespun values and our beliefs, and she glories in her status as a small-town woman who put her shoulder to the wheel and made life better for her neighbors.

---

And heres the best of it imo or in this case the worst...

quote:

---

Welcome back, Dad, even if you’re wearing a dress and bearing children this time around.

---

[img]eek.gif" border="0[/img]

I'm going to throw up:

quote:

---

What we saw was a red-blooded American with that rare, God-given ability to rally her dispirited fellow Republicans and take up the daunting task of leading them -- and all her fellow Americans -- on a pilgrimage to that shining city on the hill my father envisioned as our nation’s real destination.

---

WTF is a "red blooded American" and why does G*d favour horrible nightmares such as this woman (and her entire party of knuckle dragging pigs)?

The only "real destination" I see for the US is a further sink into religious piety and fascism.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
[QB]I'm going to throw up:

---

I think I've thrown up several times this am. The worst though was after delving into the world of the 'Christian Right' for their perspective. I came across some very negative discussions about Palin on terms that I find absolutely reprehensible across the board, as well as the seeds of an Anti-Palin/McCain campaign, that I caught myself thinking, "Gee I hope the general group that is thinking like this is big enough to actually get somewhere with this or at least affect some of the flocking from that quarter." I sat back and actually felt sick that I even thought along the lines of placing some hope in the downfall of that part of the Repubs strategy with this type of thinking.

*shudder*

That piece by Michael Reagan was sooo creepy!!! I need a shower. And it was also, like, Oedipal, not that I ever thought I'd be calling up Freud on babble. The things the Repubs will cause me to do! I feel like telling him, dude, get some therapy! Please! And, um, maybe you can go to a Freudian, if there are any left! [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]

As for the sexism against Palin. Stargazer, you know I respect and admire your posts on babble very much. But I heartily disagree. Sexism isn't about feeling "pity" for a woman, or a group of women. Sexism is .... Well hell, you know what sexism is! [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]

In this specific context I want to be clear that sexism is about words that attack Palin. Words based in sexist ideology and assumptions. No sexism is okay. Not against Condoleeza Rice, Hilary Rodham Clinton, Sarah Palin, or any woman in the public eye. I don't have to like someone to defend her against "words only" sexism.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
[b]That piece by Michael Reagan was sooo creepy!!! I need a shower. And it was also, like, Oedipal, not that I ever thought I'd be calling up Freud on babble. The things the Repubs will cause me to do! I feel like telling him, dude, get some therapy! Please! And, um, maybe you can go to a Freudian, if there are any left! [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]

As for the sexism against Palin. Stargazer, you know I respect and admire your posts on babble very much. But I heartily disagree. Sexism isn't about feeling "pity" for a woman, or a group of women. Sexism is .... Well hell, you know what sexism is! [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]

In this specific context I want to be clear that sexism is about words that attack Palin. Words based in sexist ideology and assumptions. No sexism is okay. Not against Condoleeza Rice, Hilary Rodham Clinton, Sarah Palin, or any woman in the public eye. I don't have to like someone to defend her against "words only" sexism.[/b]

---

This is exactly what I am saying. I have read on Huffington Post, comments on here, comments on Feministing questioning whether she should be running at all and stating that she should be home with the kids or insinuating that she is a bad mother because she is running to be VP. This is sexism and should be opposed no matter what you think of her views. Obama has young children and Michelle Obama has quit her job to care for them and join him on the road. Todd Palin left his job to care for the Palin family. Perhaps the message here is that national politics and young families do not mix unless one has a partner willing to sacrifice their own career for the politician's?

The angry response to Palin by Canadian progressives and feminists makes me ponder what these individuals intend to do about it. When Harper cut the court challenges program, the reaction was a flurry of emails and then meek acceptance. When Harper cut women's programs,ditto. Culture and arts funding? Ditto.

When are progressive women going to stop allowing Harper to kick sand in their faces and start fighting?

Here's what [url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080904.wcosalutin05... Salutin[/url] has to say:

quote:

---

Personally, I think Stephen Harper is calling an election now to get out from under the arts funding cloud - all the protests against his harsh cuts added onto leftover charges about trying to censor films. The issue has legs. It won't go away as he likely thought it would - after some predictable mewling by artsy types alongside some gruff appreciation from the good ol' boys. I imagine he can't understand why. I'd say it's because something has basically changed about the role of art and culture in this society. Lissen up, Stephen:

---

When will the angry resentment at social program cuts turn from words to action? An election is called for Oct. 14, where are the articulate activist women standing for parliament?

I'm certain that many progressive women will be working behind the scenes but change must come from the House. Where are the high profile names like Judy Rebeck and Maude Barlow?

If you don't like Palin as a VP candidate, think on what effect 4 years of her as VP and 8 years as President will have on social policy in the US and the ramifications for Canadians.

Long thread.